Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: dead-head_Monte Date: Dec 23, 2010 10:27am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: King Julius of the FCC , ' Veni , Vidi , Vici ' undead ( and the regs soon too)

Comcast got caught red-handed 3 years ago censoring bit torrents by limiting bandwidths and speeds to some of its high-speed internet subscribers. At first Comcast denied it. That was dishonest. Then they said they did nothing wrong. Why would they do this? My Comcast service limits me to 250 GigaBytes per month. I can pay them more to get more bandwidth. I can use Qwest as my ISP if I want to get slower bandwidth.

Comcast's contention was that delaying peer-to-peer file-sharing traffic serves user interests. Internet service providers should be as transparent as possible about manipulating network traffic. Consumers deserve to have the freedom to get what they pay for. This debate is years old. Should Net Neutrality regulations, which would prohibit network operators from prioritizing traffic as they wish, be necessary to safeguard the Internet's historically open architecture? Here's the bottom line.

Data exchange on the internet is called TCP/IP. This stands for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) and the Internet Protocol (IP). Net Neutrality means all data exchange within the TCP/IP universe will be uniform, homogeneous, and non-discriminatory. All data travels equally fast on the internet. No toll booths, no toll lanes, no speed-ups, and no slowdowns. All data packets must be transferred equally: regardless of how much legitimate peer-to-peer file-sharing I do; regardless of me seeding and leeching bit torrents; regardless of me sharing my tape recordings with you; regardless of me posting web pages here; regardless of me downloading and streaming music from The Archive.

Otherwise we've opened the door to outright blocking of political content big corporations don't like. Verizon recently did this with text messages from NARAL Pro-choice America. Losing Net Neutrality would make it much harder for new innovations like the next YouTube to get off the ground. Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace social networking sites will be off limits to you, unless you enjoy sharing free corporate infomercials with your friends. Ditto for The Archive. Web site developers, content providers, web server hosting, and internet users will ALL be required to pony up enormous new fees to all ISPs.

FCC grill Comcast 3 years ago - posted by wineland.

Net Neutrality exposé - posted by myself

Net Neutrality lawsuit against Comcastdead-head_Monte-comcast_lawsuit.jpg